Lol, reading back on these past few posts, I think we both share similar habits when driving (i.e. using voice when it's safer than using the touchscreen). Thus we both generally agree that the majority of drivers on the road would use these systems as intended to minimize the safety hazards. I think we're just disagreeing because we're arguing from different perspectives - my opinion was based on another user's distaste for not being able to touch the screen to search playlists, even when voice commands are available. I based my argument on that type of driver. Meanwhile your (and CD's) arguments are based on your own perspectives and the way you'd use the touchscreen (which is far, far more reasonable). Correct me if I'm wrong..
That said, I agree with you and CD that not being able to use the screen while in motion is an inconvenience to everyone in the car. I understand that it sucks. But part of the reason it is the way it is right now, is because of the few drivers who do use the touchscreen in an unsafe manner. I think Mazda is simply covering their own asses. It seems like they chose to sacrifice some convenience to eliminate a safety risk. I'm ok with that. My opinion of implementing lane centering before enabling the touchscreen is just a way for them to help mitigate that safety risk.
Also something to note: In the article that I posted, Mazda stated that the reason ACP works with touch and AA doesn't, is:
"Android Auto*s programming limitations required Mazda to choose between one input type or the other in certain situations, so rather than lose some usability while the car is in motion, the company opted to drop touchscreen support entirely."
Not sure why Mazda couldn't figure out a way to retain usability with the touchscreen active. I'm sure it would be difficult, but come on Mazda. Don't be lazy! lol
... You know, it could also be that because Mazda couldn't figure out how to retain full usability with the touchscreen on AA, they're simply hiding behind the guise of "it's safer, it's driver oriented, etc.". Who knows.
EDIT: I love the knob as well. My hand is always resting on my knob.... (hahaspit) I can't get behind the Tesla screen either, but if they can go full-autonomous then it doesn't really matter if you have to dig through menus. The car does the driving for you, so you'd be free to dig away! haha
Totally agree! And I think we can agree the distraction is related with the time we focused off the road and on the screen. Then , if I can do an operation, e.g. zoom the map, either with the knob or the touch, I would say the quicker the user can get it done the safer it is. So I think if it's not due to the technical incapability, give user the choice is the better way.
Some may argue they can do some operation blindly, but some operations definitely need continoues focus and touch could be quicker than knob.
And the bottom line is Mazda already admitted they can't figure out how to make knob and touch both work in AA, so they give up touch. Otherwise it will make the knob totally useless and be a proof of silly design, which wastes a lot of space and useless.